Sidewalk Assessment from the Perspective of Accessibility: A Systematic Literature Review
Publication: Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Volume 149, Issue 3
Abstract
Sidewalks represent a fundamental part of the infrastructure in cities, allowing equal and barrier-free access for everyone. However, while pedestrian accessibility is a frequent concern in developed countries, it receives little attention in developing regions. Regarding studies on pedestrian infrastructure, the characteristics of the sidewalk that are considered are also varied, as well as the aspects mainly focused on by such research. Moreover, the perception of the target user group, especially of people with disabilities, can be an important topic in this area. In this context, this paper presents a systematic literature review of sidewalk assessments, focusing on accessibility, to answer the following research questions. In which contexts are sidewalk assessments carried out? Which aspects and elements are usually considered? Are people with disabilities included? We noticed that sidewalk assessments have been a recent study topic, but with less focus on the Global South. Besides accessibility, walkability stands out as a research focus, and the sidewalk elements most addressed are surface conditions and width. Finally, the perceptions of people, especially with disabilities, are scarcely considered, demonstrating an important research gap.
Practical Applications
The sidewalk is a very important element of the city. It should allow walking, with accessibility for everyone. However, there are three things to consider: (i) sometimes the importance of an accessible sidewalk is not recognized in developing countries; (ii) the different characteristics and aspects of the sidewalk are considered differently between different studies; and (iii) the opinions of pedestrians, especially of people with disabilities, are not always present in evaluations of sidewalks. Thus, the aim of this study is to develop a systematic literature review to better understand how the sidewalks are evaluated in different studies, especially considering accessibility. In the study, the previous three findings were confirmed, with the conclusion that (i) evaluation of sidewalks is a recent topic of study, but mostly in developed countries; (ii) accessibility, walkability, and safety are frequent topics in sidewalk assessments, with surface conditions and width being the most evaluated characteristics; and (iii) few studies consider the opinions of pedestrians with disabilities. These three findings indicate topics that need to be better studied and focused on in urban planning.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The first author acknowledges financial support from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brazil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001. The third author acknowledges financial support from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)—Process 422635/2018-9 and Process 310258/2021-9.
References
ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act Standards). 2010. Americans with disabilities act standards. Washington, DC: US Access Board.
Aghaabbasi, M., M. Moeinaddini, M. Shah, and Z. Asadi-Shekar. 2017. “A new assessment model to evaluate the microscale sidewalk design factors at the neighbourhood level.” J. Transp. Health 5: 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2016.08.012.
Arellana, J., V. Alvarez, D. Oviedo, and L. A. Guzman. 2021. “Walk this way: Pedestrian accessibility and equity in Barranquilla and Soledad, Colombia.” Res. Transp. Econ. 86: 101024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2020.101024.
Arellana, J., M. Saltarín, A. M. Larra naga, V. Alvarez, and C. A. Henao. 2019. “Urban walkability considering pedestrians’ perceptions of the built environment: A 10-year review and a case study in a medium-sized city in Latin America.” Transport Rev. 40 (2): 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2019.1703842.
Barnes, C. 2011. “Understanding disability and the importance of design for all.” J. Access. Des. All 1 (1): 55–80.
Bigonnesse, C., A. Mahmood, H. Chaudhury, W. B. Mortenson, W. C. Miller, and K. A. Martin Ginis. 2018. “The role of neighborhood physical environment on mobility and social participation among people using mobility assistive technology.” Disabil. Soc. 33 (6): 866–893. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2018.1453783.
Bivina, G. R., and M. Parida. 2020. “Prioritizing pedestrian needs using a multi-criteria decision approach for a sustainable built environment in the Indian context.” Environ. Dev. Sustainability 22 (5): 4929–4950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00381-w.
Bocarejo S., J. P., and D. R. Oviedo H. 2012. “Transport accessibility and social inequities: A tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments.” J. Transp. Geogr. 24: 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.12.004.
Campisi, T., M. Ignaccolo, G. Inturri, G. Tesoriere, and V. Torrisi. 2020. “Evaluation of walkability and mobility requirements of visually impaired people in urban spaces.” Res. Transp. Bus. Manage. 40: 100592.
Carvalho, B., G. Barbosa, and P. Drach. 2020. “Investigating the walkability index of a commercial city center using simulation and surveys: The juiz de fora case study.” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 503 (1): 012098.
City of Toronto. 2021. Toronto accessibility design guidelines. Toronto, ON, Canada: City of Toronto.
Coppola, N. A., and W. E. Marshall. 2021. “Sidewalk static obstructions and their impact on clear width.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2675 (6): 200–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198121991833.
Corazza, M. V., P. Di Mascio, and L. Moretti. 2016. “Managing sidewalk pavement maintenance: A case study to increase pedestrian safety.” J. Traffic Transp. Eng. 3 (3): 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2016.04.001.
Costa, M., P. Cambra, F. Moura, and M. Marques. 2019. “WalkBot: A portable system to scan sidewalks.” In Proc., 5th IEEE Int. Smart Cities Conf., 167–172. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
CRD (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination). 2009. Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. York, UK: Univ. of York.
Denyer, D., and D. Tranfield. 2009. “Producing a systematic review.” In The Sage handbook of organizational research methods, edited by D. Buchanan and A. Bryman, 671–689. London: Sage.
Ferreira, M. C., P. D. Costa, D. Abrantes, J. Hora, S. Felício, M. Coimbra, and T. G. Dias. 2022. “Identifying the determinants and understanding their effect on the perception of safety, security, and comfort by pedestrians and cyclists: A systematic review.” Transp. Res. Part F Psychol. Behav. 91: 136–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2022.10.004.
Fiorelli, M. N., L. S. Rocha, J. L. S. D. Alencar, J. H. Simoni, G. D. Angelis Neto, and B. L. D. D. Angelis. 2015. “Accessibility assessment for pedestrians na avenida brazil how much the perception of usuario -maringá/ PR.” Rev. Eletrônica Gest. Educ. Tecnol. Ambient. 19 (3): 563–575.
Freund, P. 2001. “Bodies, disability and spaces: The social model and disabling spatial organisations.” Disabil. Soc. 16 (5): 689–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590120070079.
Gamache, S., F. Routhier, W. B. Mortenson, W. C. Miller, K. A. M. Ginis, and E. Lacroix. 2020. “Objective evaluation of architectural obstacles encountered in two Canadian urban settings by mobility device users.” J. Access. Des. All 10 (1): 98–123.
Gehl, J. 2011. Life between buildings: Using public space. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Halabya, A., and K. El-Rayes. 2018. “Compliance analysis of pedestrian facilities with accessibility requirements.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 45 (5): 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2016-0598.
HM Government. 2013. The Building Regulations 2010. Approved document M: Access to and use of buildings. London, UK: NBS.
Hou, Q., and C. Ai. 2020. “A network-level sidewalk inventory method using mobile LiDAR and deep learning.” Transp. Res. Part C Emerging Technol. 119: 102772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2020.102772.
Ignaccolo, M., G. Inturri, N. Giuffrida, M. L. Pira, V. Torrisi, and G. Calabrò. 2020. “A step towards walkable environments: Spatial analysis of pedestrian compatibility in an urban context.” Eur. Transp. 1 (76): 12.
Iwarsson, S., and A. Ståhl. 2003. “Accessibility, usability and universal design - positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships.” Disabil. Rehabil. 25 (2): 57–66.
Kaur, H., P. Singh, G. R. Bivina, and A. Nawani. 2021. “Qualitative evaluation of pedestrian facilities using the PLOS model.” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 775 (1): 012004.
Kim, S., S. Park, and J. S. Lee. 2014. “Meso- or micro-scale? Environmental factors influencing pedestrian satisfaction.” Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 30: 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.05.005.
Kitchenham, B. 2007. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. 2.3. UK: Keele University and University of Durham.
Lee, S., and E. Talen. 2014. “Measuring walkability: A note on auditing methods.” J. Urban Des. 19 (3): 368–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2014.890040.
Li, H., J. Cebe, S. Khoeini, Y. A. Xu, C. Dyess, and R. Guensler. 2018. “A semi-automated method to generate GIS-based sidewalk networks for asset management and pedestrian accessibility assessment.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2672 (44): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118757981.
Li, H., Y. Lin, Y. Wang, J. Liu, S. Liang, S. Guo, and T. Qiang. 2021. “Multi-criteria analysis of a people-oriented urban pedestrian road system using an integrated fuzzy AHP and DEA approach: A case study in Harbin, China.” Symmetry 13 (11): 2214. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13112214.
Li, Y., J. A. Hsu, and G. Fernie. 2013. “Aging and the use of pedestrian facilities in winter–the need for improved design and better technology.” J. Urban Health 90 (4): 602–617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9779-2.
Lima, J. P., and M. H. Machado. 2019. “Walking accessibility for individuals with reduced mobility: A Brazilian case study.” Case Stud. Transp. Policy 7 (2): 269–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2019.02.007.
Lo, R. H. 2009. “Walkability: What is it?” J. Urbanism 2 (2): 145–166.
Machado, M. H., and J. P. Lima. 2015. “Multicriteria evaluation of people with reduced mobility accessibility: A study in downtown itajubá (MG).” Urbe. Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana 7 (3): 368–382. https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-3369.007.003.AO08.
Mateo-Babiano, I. 2016. “Pedestrian’s needs matter: Examining Manila’s walking environment.” Transp. Policy 45: 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.09.008.
Murwadi, H., and B. Dewancker. 2017. “Study of quassessment model for campus pedestrian ways, case study: Sidewalk of the university of lampung.” Sustainability 9 (12): 2285. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122285.
Nikiforiadis, A., S. Basbas, F. Mikiki, A. Oikonomou, and E. Polymeroudi. 2021. “Pedestrians-cyclists shared spaces level of service: Comparison of methodologies and critical discussion.” Sustainability 13 (1): 361. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010361.
Paraskevopoulos, Y., S. Tsigdinos, and M. Andrakakou. 2020. “Associating walkability features with pedestrian activity in a central athens neighborhood.” Eur. J. Geogr. 11 (4): 157–172. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.
Pembuaim, A., S. Priyanto, and L. B. Suparma. 2020. “The evaluation of tactile ground surface indicator condition and effectiveness on the sidewalk in Yogyakarta City, Indonesia.” IATSS Res. 44 (1): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iatssr.2019.04.002.
Pereira, L. D. F., M. S. D. Albuquerque, and L. D. S. Portugal. 2014. “Access of wheelchair users in sportive mega events: The case of confederation cup.” Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 162: 148–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.195.
Rajaee, M., B. Echeverri, Z. Zuchowicz, K. Wiltfang, and J. F. Lucarelli. 2021. “Socioeconomic and racial disparities of sidewalk quality in a traditional rust belt city.” SSM Popul. Health 16: 100975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100975.
Rangel, P. A., C. T. Formoso, L. I. G. Miron, and M. E. S. Echeveste. 2019. “Method for the post-occupation technical evaluation of the quality of social housing communal areas.” Ambiente Construído 20 (1): 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-862120200001003.
Rocha, V. T. D., L. L. Brandli, R. M. L. Kalil, A. L. Salvia, and P. D. M. Prietto. 2019. “Quality of sidewalks in a Brazilian city: A broad vision.” Theor. Empir. Res. Urban Manage. 14 (2): 41–58.
Ruiz-Padillo, A., L. Oestreich, T. B. Torres, P. S. Rhoden, A. M. Larranaga, and H. B. Cybis. 2022. “Weighted assessment of barriers to walking in small cities: A Brazilian case.” Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 109: 103392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103392.
Santana-Santana, S. B., C. Pe na-Alonso, and E. P.-C. Espino. 2020. “Assessing physical accessibility conditions to tourist attractions. The case of maspalomas costa canaria urban area (Gran Canaria, Spain).” Appl. Geogr. 125: 102327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2020.102327.
Schreuer, N., P. Plaut, L. Golan, and D. Sachs. 2019. “The relations between walkable neighbourhoods and active participation in daily activities of people with disabilities.” J. Transp. Health 15: 100630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.100630.
Sharifi, M. S., K. Christensen, A. Chen, D. Stuart, Y. S. Kim, and Y. Q. Chen. 2017. “A large-scale controlled experiment on pedestrian walking behavior involving individuals with disabilities.” Travel Behav. Soc. 8: 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2017.03.003.
Silva, O. H. D., and G. D. Angelis Neto. 2019. “Sidewalk service index (ISC).” Ambiente Construído 19 (1): 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-86212019000100303.
Smith, M., J. Hosking, A. Woodward, K. Witten, A. MacMillan, A. Field, P. Baas, and H. Mackie. 2017. “Systematic literature review of built environment effects on physical activity and active transport – An update and new findings on health equity.” Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 14 (1): 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0613-9.
Sousa, N., J. Coutinho-Rodrigues, and E. Natividade-Jesus. 2017. “Sidewalk infrastructure assessment using a multicriteria methodology for maintenance planning.” J. Infrastruct. Syst. 23 (4): 05017002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000362.
Southworth, M. 2005. “Designing the walkable city.” J. Urban Plann. Dev. 131 (4): 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2005)131:4(246).
Sultan, B., I. Katar, and M. E. Al-Atroush. 2021. “Towards sustainable pedestrian mobility in Riyadh City, Saudi Arabia: A case study.” Sustainable Cities Soc. 69: 102831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102831.
Tajgardoon, M., and H. A. Karimi. 2015. “Simulating and visualizing sidewalk accessibility for wayfinding of people with disabilities.” Int. J. Cartogr. 1 (1): 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/23729333.2015.1055646.
Tarawneh, D. 2020. “Sidewalk challenges in Amman, Jordan, and the urge for context-specific walkability measurement and evaluation tools.” In Sustainable development and social responsibility–Volume 2. Advances in science, technology & innovation, edited by A. N. Al-Masri and Y. Al-Assaf, Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation, 203–218. Berlin: Springer.
Thomé, A. M. T., L. F. Scavarda, and A. J. Scavarda. 2016. “Conducting systematic literature review in operations management.” Prod. Plann. Control 27 (5): 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1129464.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2020. The next frontier: Human development and the Anthropocene. Number 2020 in Human Development Report. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
Unsworth, C., M. H. So, J. Chua, P. Gudimetla, and A. Naweed. 2021. “A systematic review of public transport accessibility for people using mobility devices.” Disabil. Rehabil. 43 (16): 2253–2267. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1697382.
van Eck, N. J., and L. Waltman. 2013. VOSviewer. Leiden University's Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS). Leiden, The Netherlands: Leiden University.
Xiong, Y., Q.-C. Lu, and Y. Hu. 2020. “Elderly fitness-oriented urban street design: Case study in Nanchang, China.” J. Urban Plann. Dev. 146 (1): 05019021. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000547.
Yílmaz, M. 2018. “Public space and accessibility.” ICONARP Int. J. Archit. Plann. 6: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2018.46.
Yoon, H.-Y., J.-H. Kim, and J.-W. Jeong. 2022. “Classification of the sidewalk condition using self-supervised transfer learning for wheelchair safety driving.” Sensors 22 (1): 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22010380.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Volume 149 • Issue 3 • September 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 2, 2022
Accepted: May 16, 2023
Published online: Jul 6, 2023
Published in print: Sep 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Dec 6, 2023
ASCE Technical Topics:
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.